1. Field of the Invention
This invention lies in the general field of fluid treatment, purification, and processing. More specifically this invention functions through the application of the a magnetic field on a fluid containing charged particles or ions, wherein the relative velocity of the particles perpendicular to the magnetic field lines produces a well known resultant force on the ions. Thus the invention is in the field wherein fluids are treated by means of a magnetic fields that induces ion movement through a Lorentz force phenomena.
The invention also lies in the general field of ion propulsion through the use of a moving magnetic field as is found in the area of plasma physics with certain applications concerned with rocket propulsion and controlled fusion. The application of this invention is not in these areas but is in a low energy regime with application for the redistribution of surface charges on small particles or aggregates of particles within the treated fluid.
2. Brief Description of Prior Art
There have been numerous designs for the magnetic treatment of fluids, specifically water, by inventors both in Europe and the United States. All previous designs utilized fixed or oscillating magnetic fields not spatially translating magnetic fields aligned transverse to the direction of fluid flow. Minerals dissolved in the fluid to be treated appear as suspended charged particles (ions). Ions moving solely with the fluid's velocity through a magnetic field are acted on by a force known as the Lorentz force. This force is usually stated in vector form as: EQU F.sub.L =J.times.B
Where F.sub.L is the Lorentz Force vector, J the current vector or charges, q, moving at Velocity V, and B the Magnetic Field vector. This equation may be rewritten as: F.sub.L =qV.times.B. Since the charge, q, can be either positive or negative the Lorentz force F.sub.L, will be perpendicular to the plane of the two vectors, V and B, but in or out of that plane depending on the charge.
The foregoing is well known and has been the basis of most of the prior art in this field. In numerous cases it has been determined by various persons that the induction of a Lorentz force in a fluid has resulted in the reduction and prevention of the formation of various encrusting mineral scale formations on the interior portions of fluid conduits. The most well known and cited example being that of calcium carbonate, where the hard scale deposit know as calcite is converted to a soft loose sludge, which is easily removed. The benefit of this art is to prevent the loss of the system's efficiency through losses in both the rate of flow of the fluid and heat transfer by the fluid through the conduit walls due to the constriction and insulation caused by the scale build up.
Hertzog U.S. Pat. No. 4,946,590 discloses a water treatment device consisting of permanent magnets clamped on a conduit so that the direction of the fixed field is perpendicular to the flow of the fluid. This is typical of many devices that are in use all over the world. It is claimed, without a detailed physical argument, that a reversal of the magnetic field along the fluid flow path is beneficial. It makes use of the Lorentz force to produce the results mentioned above, but does not explain the physics of the process beyond a mention of ion agitation and depends totally on the velocity of the fluid to create the effect.
There are a number of similar applications of this art. Moody U.S. Pat. No. 3,228,878 is a permanent magnet device that has no field reversal and fixed permanent magnets. Green et al U.S. Pat. No. 2,939,830 has an field reversal using an electromagnet and alternating current. Granger U.S. Pat. No. 4,229,389, Fujita U.S. Pat. No. 4,188,296, Mitchell U.S. Pat. No. 4,755,288 and Carpenter U.S. Pat. No. 4,367,143 make use of fixed magnetic fields that and claim to improve and enhance the quality and utility of a variety of fluids.
Brigante in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,347,133; 4,148,731; 4,151,090; and 4,288,323 teaches a helical geometry for the flow of a fluid within a cylindrical conduit in which a fixed axial magnetic field has been induced by means of an electromagnet. In this case the Lorentz force is achieved by the circular component of the fluids velocity which is perpendicular to the axial magnetic field. Claims of efficacy in cleaning ground water, separating fine solids, and removing magnetic particles are made. No spatially translating magnetic field is used.
Each of the foregoing patent disclosures, and foreign patents: SU 1430357A Russian; ETA 0277524 German; 46-2639 Japan; and 1212969 Russian, all are of the type wherein Lorentz forces are induced by fluid velocity alone. They are incorporated in the teachings of the current patent only in that the show the efficacy of such treatment to reduce calcareous scale accummulations and other benifits. In no instance does any of this art suggest the use of spatial translation of magnetic fields to produce a relative velocity of the fluid to the magnetic field. No concise and clear cut explanation of the physical or chemical processes involved is proffered by any of these teachings beyond a vague reference to Lorentz force initiation and ion agitation.
A second area of prior art is that which deals with applications of moving magnetic fields. Though no art was found that described the use of moving magnetic fields transverse to conduits of fluid to produce Lorentz force treatment of nonmagnetic particles suspended in the fluid, there are some teachings on moving fields. Dudnik et al Russian Inventor's Certificate No. SU 0722576 teaches a moving solenoidial magnetic field that is axial, not transverse, to the fluid conduit and moves parallel to the axis thus inducing no Lorentz force. The purpose of the solenoid magnetic field is to remove ferromagnetic particles only, and not to effect ion transport or provide any other benefit.
All prior art has relied to varying degrees on an assumption that the introduction of magnetic fields to fluids flowing in a conduit would induce some benefit. Grutsch and McClinctock in Paper No. 330 in the Corrosion '84 conference sponsored by the National Association of Corrosion Engineers, (NACE), provide a survey of numerous applications of magnetic water treatment. They describe four different geometries employed to achieve treatment. In all cases the magnetic fields were fixed and not subject to spatial translation. No concise theories are offered as to the process involved, but support for the theoretical arguments that no physical change can be induced in the water molecule, itself, by magnetic fields are reiterated.
Busch et al in Paper No. 251 in NACE Corrosion '85 conference describe experiments preformed at Baylor University in which a permanent magnet water treatment system was tested. There results show the presence of weak induced electric potentials and currents, with clear dependence on fluid flow rates. A number of hypotheses were suggested that were dependent on the induction of the measured electric current, but no definitive argument could be made for any of the vague models proffered.
The most significant advance in the understanding of the phenomenon heretofore, is given by Donaldson and Grimes in the Feb. 18, 1988 issued of the New Scientist, published in England. In that and two other papers: Donaldson in January 1988 Tube International; and Grimes in March 1988 Tube International, detailed evidence is provided on the changes in crystal morphology, phase, growth rates, and solubility. Shown conclusively, through the use of electron and optical microscopy, and X-ray diffraction analysis, are the comparative results of magnetic treatment of hard water using a permanent magnetic flow through device. Comparative micrographs clearly show dramatic changes of the suspended crystals after magnetic treatment. A sixteen fold reversal of the ratios for the calcium carbonate crystal phases, calcite and aragonite, was shown. This is of particular importance in that it provides a link in the causal argument of how calcite scale build up is removed from systems.
Donaldson and Grimes offer three possible modalities for the observed effects. Turbulence induced by the physical geometry of the treatment apparatus may have some small effects, but analysis shows it to be of lower order than that of observed results. Collision processes attributed to the Lorentz force are argued to be also of lower order. They attribute the primary cause to be that of changes induced on the surfaces of crystal nuclei. "The magnetic field acts at the surface of the crystallites, modifying the nature of the charges at the surface. This alters the growth of the crystals in general and on specific planes. Such a modification of the way nuclei form around which crystals grow explains everything we have seen." They further state, "At the interface between solids and fluids, diffusion layers arise between the solution and the faces of the growing crystal. The growing faces each carry a distinctive charge. How the magnetic field affects the surface of the crystal and the diffusion layer is critical."
In all previous teachings on this art there has been no introduction of translating magnetic fields. The work by Donaldson and Grimes is the key to understanding how the process works, yet, they have not worked out the details of the surface processes. It is the actual force and energy constraints on the surfaces that control the event thresholds and rates for the formation of crystal surfaces. Our research has revealed a theory that allows the calculation of these key parameters. The embodiment presented herein allows the fine tuning and high range of variation that bring the fullest application of this technology to the widest range of phenomena.